If you people still believe in the official story of 9/11 it is
about time that you open your eyes as to what is unfolding as
the greatest deception and treason in the history of human civilization probably!

Read the following carefully, study it and then ask yourself: What are we going to do about this?

Scholars Call for Release of 9/11 Information
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND
OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:*
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT,

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the Undersigned Scholars for 9/11 Truth Hereby Petitions for, and hereby demands, Release of the Following kinds of documents, video and films, and physical evidence to the public for study by experts and scholars investigating the events of 9/11:

1. Immediate release of the full Pentagon surveillance tapes, of which five frames (only) have been released via the official ASCE report, as Judicial Watch has also requested. We further demand release of the video tape seized by FBI agents minutes after the Pentagon hit, from the fuel service station near the Pentagon, as well as any other videotape which shows the 9/11 strike on the Pentagon.

2. Immediate release of 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage held by NIST, largely from private photographers, regarding the collapses of WTC buildings on 9/11/2001 (NIST, 2005, p. 81). In particular, all footage relating to the collapse of WTC 7 (including shots before, during and after the collapse) must be released immediately, without waiting for the NIST report on WTC 7, which is long overdue and may be prolonged indefinitely.

3. An explanation from Vice President Richard Cheney regarding the "orders" described by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta in his testimony before The 9/11 Commission. Secretary Mineta stated that while in an underground bunker at the White House, he watched Vice President Cheney castigate a young officer for asking, as a plane drew closer and closer to the Pentagon, "Do the orders still stand?" The officer should be identified and allowed to testify at a deposition under oath.

4. The documents generated by Vice President Cheney's energy task force have been kept from the public. A court case brought forth a few maps that display oil fields in the Middle East. We hereby put Congress on notice that there is probable cause with regard to criminal activities by the Cheney Energy Task Force involving a criminal conspiracy to launch illegal wars and/or terrorist activities. We therefore demand that Energy Task Force document that comprise, discuss, or refer to plans to invade the Middle East, including Iran, and Venezuela or other sovereign nations be released immediately.

See Cheney v. District Court 542 U.S. 367 (2004) and United States v. Nixon 418
U.S. 683 (1974).

5. Audio tapes of interviews with air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 were intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building. We demand an explanation for this destruction of evidence and ask that the possible existence of other copies of such tapes or perhaps of written transcripts of the interviews be pursued. All air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 should be allowed to testify during a public forum under oath.

6. The Secret Service, which is highly trained to protect the President from danger and to move him to a secure location in the event of a threat, breached its own standard procedures by allowing President Bush to remain at a public location for 25 minutes after it was known that the nation was under attack. All Secret Service personnel who were at Booker Elementary School with President Bush on 9/11 should be required to testify in public and under oath about these events.

7. On the morning of 9/11, some five "war games" or "terror drills" were being conducted by U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise employing aircraft. These drills reportedly included the injection of false radar blips onto the screens of air traffic controllers. In addition, the government was running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building the morning of 9/11. Who was in charge of coordinating these war games and terror drills? Who had the ability to issues orders in relation to their conduct? On which screens were "false radar blips" inserted? When did such false injects commence? When were they purged from the controllers' screens? What was the effect of these activities on standard procedures for interdicting hijacked aircraft?

8. It has been reported that the FBI long ago found three of four "black boxes" from the two airplanes which hit the Twin Towers, yet has consistently denied that they were ever found. Their data would be of the greatest importance to understanding the events of 9/11. This matter must be investigated and the data they provide released to the public.

For each of the four sites under investigation, the 9/11 Commission reported that two Boeing 757s, and two Boeing 767s (FAA, Part 121, airliners) owned by United Airlines and American Airlines were hijacked by novice pilots and were subsequently crashed, resulting in an unimaginable loss of life. Approximately 3,000 people died the morning of 9/11 as the direct result of these officially reported hijackings and subsequent crashes.

These four scheduled airliners were reported to have carried a total of 266 passengers and crew members, which, under FAA and NTSB regulations, demands a comprehensive investigation of the primary and contributing causes of each. In the case of suspected criminal foul play, the NTSB would normally assign the lead investigative role to the FBI, with assistance of investigators from the NTSB and FAA. A comprehensive investigation of each aircraft crash is not a regulatory option: they would have been mandatory. Therefore, we demand public release of each comprehensive crash investigation report, including access to all physical evidence that was required to have been collected and secured at a suitable facility. Such evidence should have included a large assortment of indestructible parts, including landing gears, surface actuators, engines, black boxes, and so on. The serialized parts would be invaluable in identifying each aircraft and, contrary to some reports, could not have "vaporized" upon impact.

Considering the enormous loss of life and financial collateral damage, if no crash investigations were conducted, who made the decision to disregard the FAA, Part 121, regulatory requirement? In the absence of the Part 121 investigation reports, the identity of the responsible authorities who made the decision not to investigate must be released, and they should be made immediately available for deposition under oath.

9. In the weeks before 9/11, the US Stock market showed rather high levels of activity on companies that would subsequently be affected by the attacks. The afternoon before the attack, alarm bells were sounding over trading patterns in stock options. A jump in United Air Lines some 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, for example, and 285 times higher than average the Thursday before the attack, have been reported. A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal the day before the attacks has also been reported. No similar trading occurred on any other airlines appear to have occurred.

Between September 6-10, 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw suspicious trading on Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley, two of the largest WTC tenants. An average of 3,053 put options in Merrill Lynch were bought between Sept. 6-10, compared to an average of 252 in the previous week. Merrill Lynch, another WTC tenant, saw 12,215 put options bought between Sept. 7-10, whereas the previous days had seen averages of 212 contracts a day. According to Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg News: "This would be the most extraordinary coincidence in the history of mankind, if it was a coincidence. This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you’ve ever seen in your entire life. It’s absolutely unprecedented."

On September 18, 2001, the BBC reported: "American authorities are investigating unusually large numbers of shares in airlines, insurance companies and arms manufacturers that were sold off in the days and weeks before the attacks. They believe that the sales were by people who knew about the impending disaster". According to the London Independent, October 10, 2001: "To the embarrassment of investigators, it has also emerged that the firm used to buy many of the 'put' options—where a trader, in effect, bets on a share price fall—on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by 'Buzzy' Krongard, now executive director of the CIA."

The 9/11 Commission, after looking into the pre-9/11 stock trades, never denied their unusual nature. Instead, the Commission declared that al-Qaeda did not conduct the trades, and asked no further questions.

Who, if not al-Qaeda, performed the incriminating trades? This information exists, it can be easily obtained, and it needs to be made public. Moreover, illegal money transfers may have been processed through computers housed at the World Trade Center shortly before planes crashed into the Twin Towers on 9/11. We demand a disclosure of the source of the put options and that this whole sordid affair receive a complete and public investigation.

10. Eyewitness testimony and a substantiating photographic record suggest that a large sample of slag from the World Trade Center is being held at Hangar 17 of the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. Access to the slag sample should be made available to appropriate physicists in order to conduct non-destructive X-ray Fluorescence tests and other forms of examination, which should reveal evidence of the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers. Based on these tests, we further demand two small samples (about the size of a fist) be extracted from this large piece for further scientific analysis.

11. Release of a complete inventory of the plane wreckage and debris from flights 11, 77, 93 or 175 or any other aircraft that crashed or was destroyed on September 11, 2001, including, but not limited to:

(a) the location (whether warehouses or otherwise) of all such items;

(B) a catalog of photographs and videotapes taken of any and all such items; and

On behalf of the People of the United States of America, we demand that the cover-up in this case end and that the kinds of documents, video and films, and physical evidence described above be provided to the public for experts and scholars to evaluate and assess in their efforts to expose falsehoods and reveal truths about events on 9/11.

And, i am not here to argue or fight with people, i have spent
hours beyond hours investigating about this and read basically
every report, document, the official documents, individual testimonies and so on.
"Why?" you ask - Because things that have happened and you
start thinking and placing logic and common sense in your
examinations you will conclude that indeed something fishy is
about it.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_stateme nt_15.pdf
Another minor(?) thing that is kind of odd is that they speak
of "Bin Ladin" in the official 9/11 documents while everywhere
on the world knows it is spelled as "Bin Laden". Did they make
a "stupid" typo? Or is this the reason why he is not on the FBI
website most wanted terrorists for the attacks of 9/11? Just odd
to say the least...

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html
Lastly, why did the US invade Afghanistan, followed by Iraq and
why is Iran the next target?
[*]Afghanistan: Taliban goverment does not want the US to pass
through Afghan territory constructing a pipeline to Pakistan coastlines for natural gas transport.
(In 1998 or so Clinton
forbade the US to do business with Taliban).
[*]The US needs a REASON to invade Afghanistan overthrow the
Taliban goverment and construct their natural gas pipeline to Pakistan coast.
---This is where 9/11 is born. An 'act of war', the US already 'knows'
that Laden (or is it Ladin?) is hiding in the mountains of
Afghanistan so they invade and start building their pipelines.

So why Iraq you ask?
[*] Iraq started selling their oil in EUROS as of early 2000, it
caused a -17% collapse of the US dollar, thus saddam, who is
obviously proven by now not a threat to world peace was invaded
and the US turned the wheel around and Iraq oil is once again
priced in US dollars.

Why is Iran the next target?
[*] Iran just recently started selling their oil in EUROS as well
as of March 2006. And being the 2nd largest oil producer in the
world that will definately not do good for the US dollar.

I know and i have seen that Iran is provoking the US to attack,
with their comments on achieving Uranium enrichment and nuclear
technology.
This is EXACTLY what they want...

A House bill has been introduced that would change the 22nd amendment and enable George Bush to remain President for the rest of his political life.
The bill would repeal limitations on a President holding office for a maximum of two terms.

That Bush saw the first plane crash before entering the Brooker school, when that wasn't aired till the
following day, how was he watching the FIRST plane hit ???? And how could he have watched it unless they
knew it was going to happen in the first place. Why would television be looking at the World Trade centre
at all unless there was a reason??

Why does the Gov. not release the confiscated videotapes from the gasstation and the hotel across the street
which definately recorded the plane impact on the Pentagon.
Why did they DENY any video existed at first, and later release FIVE FRAMES showing only the explosion but
without any trace to a Boeing...
Examin the frames and you will notice a white smoke trail in the center-right, that is not a Boeing lol.
Another fact what alot of people forget about the pentagon is this: When the "plane" impacted the building,
the ROOF did NOT collapse, the collapse followed hours later and notice that the roof is not showing ANY damage.
Futhermore the entire front of the point of impact is completely inconsistent with the damage a Boeing would have
done.
Watch photos from the pentagon or videos from CNN and you will see a large group of people collecting debris
from a crashsite that needed to be examined thorougly. This 'evidence' was immediately destroyed. Also they
are seen carrying away a huge box(container) with a blue plastic cover minutes after impact, what was inside it?
Why were there Trucks on the grass in front of the pentagon dumping layers of sand the minute after the crash
while the firemen were still there fighting the fires?

The NORTH tower was hit by a plane first and collapsed LATER that the SOUTH tower. The South tower collapsed
first which doesnt make alot sense.
Furthermore if you look at the CNN videos while the towers collapse you can clearly see explosions going on far
below the zone that is collapsing.
Countless eyewitnesses have testified they heared multiple explosions INCLUDING firefighters, the recorded firemen
radio mentions the existance of multiple explosions over and over.
The buildings fell into their own FOOTPRINT, this is practically impossible -if we are to believe the various
reports of educated people in engineering and controlled demolition fields- without the use of explosive charges
strategically placed throughout the buildings.
Also note that there were evacuation drills and powerouts a week before 9/11.http://www.wnbc.com/news/1315651/detail.html | http://www.nbvfd3.org/audio/wtc03.mp3http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg !!

Ground Zero was immediately seiled off from the public, nobody but FEMA, FBI and CIA were allowed on the scene.
Debris, steel and all sorts of rubble was taken from the site as soon as possible to be destroyed. Cleaning the
evidence and leaving nothing for 'independent investigation teams' to discover and examin.
Surely you must be wondering about this: If indeed the construction of the WTC failed, numerous investigators
would want to see the rubble to determine the cause of the collapses to prevent such disasters from happening
in the future by making sure the same design error wouldnt be made.
Moreover SIX WEEKS after the WTC collapses at the base of the WTC when alot of the rubble was removed they
dug up a pile of RED HOT LIQUID steel of intense heat. How on earth did the base get so hot if the impact zone
of the plane were hundreds of meters above it? Explosives called C4 generally create enough heat to cause this!
Jet Fuel is not hot enough to melt huge quality steel bars like that! Impossible, especially knowing the towers
were only about 40mins on fire or something. There are countless other buildings all over the world that had fires
all over entire stories high and they did not collapse after burning for over 20 hours! << Now that is hot!
The whole buildings are litteraly pulverized to dust/power during their collapse, this is impossible without
the use of explosives.

Too late the pilot of the U.S. Army B-25 bomber with three men aboard, saw the Empire State Building loom
up before his eyes. At 300 miles per hour, he plunged through the 34th Street side of the building wreaking
havoc.
The major portion of the wreckage penetrated the 78th floor. An engine hurtled down an elevator shaft igniting a
furious fire in the basement. Parts of the motor and landing gear tore through the entire building landing on top of a
13-story ediface across the street and igniting a second conflagration.

It did not collapse...
("An engine hurtled down an elevator shaft" -- Do some research on the WTC and you will learn this is not possible
in the case of the WTC towers. There are multiple elevator shafts in the WTC to prevent the shaft working as a big
chimney in case of fires.)
source: http://www.evesmag.com/empirestatecrash.htm

Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt

The building pulverized under its own weight and wtc 7 sustained massive structural damage to its lower levels destroying the structural integrity of the building. You sir are just another MP idiot trying to sound smart becuase you found a conspiracy theorists website. Also, if you look up the that bill EVERY president has attempted to pass something similar to that effect. So be quiet idiot.

I honestly didn't think you could sink any further, zunnie. I stand corrected. You just entered the point of no return. Not that we wanted you to return, anyways...

See, here's the thing. Two planes... they were hijacked. They then ran into the buildings. See, when a structure is weakenend, it tends to collapse. That's what happened on 9/11. I put that in as easy of terms as I could put it.

Did you think that maybe...MAYBE...the red-hot metal in the rubble came from the UPPER floor? Which collapsed along with the rest of the building? Because when a building falls, the top kinda gets mixed in with the bottom.
Or it was Photoshopped in. Because conspiracy theorists never have alterior motives.

Also, if you will watch the actual footage of the collapse, you can see that the buildings started to collapse NOT from the bottom, as they would if they had been C4d, but rather from where they had been hit...where the steel had been sufficiently weakened by the jet fuel. If they were C4d, the "secret agents" would have had to climb up X many stories in both buildings, through the fire, without being seen by escaping civilians, cops, or firefighters.

And why would a B-24 bomber not cause the Empire State Building to fall? Big difference between a B-24 and a 7X7 #1: NO JET FUEL. B-24s are propeller-driven.

As to why Bush's statue has no end date on it yet? Just in case he resigns or is impeached or nutcases such as yourself decide to assassinate him.

If you wanna be a badass ex-marine law enforcment game programmer college graduate, then you can be! I'm just glad we don't see the other part of you where you join AOL chat rooms as "hotchik69" and cyber with guys while you spank off into a sock and then cry yourself to sleep on your cock-shaped pillow.

tzarmind wrote on Sat, 06 January 2007 20:52

Not only did you immaturely edit what J_Ball said in your quote. But you fucking got in the irony truck and drove it straight off a cliff.

Canadacdn wrote on Tue, 23 October 2007 12:04

California burns down every year. I think it's part of nature's cycle.

Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt

Reality check here: the Empire State (steel girders and concrete) and WTC towers (load-bearing steel skin and steel core structure) were built using different methods of construction. The aircraft types are also massively different to the point that it isn't even funny...lemme run off a few of the differences here:

- The B-25 was a light, twin engined bomber. The closest size comparison I can offer is a prop-driven puddle-jumper (the lighter planes used by airlines for short hops)...not a very huge plane. It was also completely empty apart from its flight crew; it had neither bombs nor cargo or passenegers on board.
- The Boeing 757 and 767 are BIG planes. Their engines measure about the diameter of the BODY of the B-25. Both aircraft carry hundreds of people and multiple tons of cargo. We're talking a LOT of MASS here, and a lot of mass causes a LOT of damage when it impacts.
- The B-25, being a piston-engined aircraft, used aviation gasoline as fuel (similar to what your CAR runs on). It was also at the end of its flight on impact, meaning that its fuel tanks were very close to empty.
- The Boeing jets used on 9/11 were fueled by commercial jet fuel. It burns hotter than gasoline- and the planes were fully fueled or at least mostly full when they impacted those buildings. Let's not even discuss how much MORE of the stuff these planes carry.
- The B-25 was built, for the most part, from steel.
- Modern airliners are constructed from aluminum and lightweight composite materials. The only thing on an airliner that isn't likely to burn in a crash is its LANDING GEAR.
- The pilot of the B-25 was not intending to crash into the Empire State. He made a navigational error in poor weather. It was a freak accident and the only thing totaled was the plane.
- The hijackers DID intend to crash into the WTC towers and the Pentagon. They had studied the buildings and the planes to determine where to strike in order to bring the buildings down. They angled their planes to cause the most damage to the widest possible area, and accelerated on approach- making no attempt to evade a collision.

Oh, but they must be the same because a plane hit a skyscraper in both incidents, right? Fool, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Go away before you embarass yourself any more.

[Updated on: Wed, 12 April 2006 11:46]

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine

Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.

I think this business of flaming people who come to this forum with information they've found captivating when it's simply incongrous with your primordial beliefs needs to stop. Especially when you don't make an effort to debunk it. Zunny's raising points that weren't in the last 9/11 thread.

I'm not sure what to think on this, but I do have one question I don't think I've ever seen answered: Why did Tower #7 collapse?

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)

And, i am not here to argue or fight with people, i have spent
hours beyond hours investigating about this and read basically
every report, document, the official documents, individual testimonies and so on.
"Why?" you ask - Because things that have happened and you
start thinking and placing logic and common sense in your
examinations you will conclude that indeed something fishy is
about it.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_stateme nt_15.pdf
Another minor(?) thing that is kind of odd is that they speak
of "Bin Ladin" in the official 9/11 documents while everywhere
on the world knows it is spelled as "Bin Laden". Did they make
a "stupid" typo? Or is this the reason why he is not on the FBI
website most wanted terrorists for the attacks of 9/11? Just odd
to say the least...

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html
Lastly, why did the US invade Afghanistan, followed by Iraq and
why is Iran the next target?
[*]Afghanistan: Taliban goverment does not want the US to pass
through Afghan territory constructing a pipeline to Pakistan coastlines for natural gas transport.
(In 1998 or so Clinton
forbade the US to do business with Taliban).
[*]The US needs a REASON to invade Afghanistan overthrow the
Taliban goverment and construct their natural gas pipeline to Pakistan coast.
---This is where 9/11 is born. An 'act of war', the US already 'knows'
that Laden (or is it Ladin?) is hiding in the mountains of
Afghanistan so they invade and start building their pipelines.

So why Iraq you ask?
[*] Iraq started selling their oil in EUROS as of early 2000, it
caused a -17% collapse of the US dollar, thus saddam, who is
obviously proven by now not a threat to world peace was invaded
and the US turned the wheel around and Iraq oil is once again
priced in US dollars.

Why is Iran the next target?
[*] Iran just recently started selling their oil in EUROS as well
as of March 2006. And being the 2nd largest oil producer in the
world that will definately not do good for the US dollar.

I know and i have seen that Iran is provoking the US to attack,
with their comments on achieving Uranium enrichment and nuclear
technology.
This is EXACTLY what they want...

Even if your evidence was convincing, I'd still have one fact that I could use to defend the fact that our nation was attacked by a foreign party:

We don't need to be attacked to go to war. We weren't attacked to join Vietnam. We weren't attacked to join Korea. We weren't attacked (by Iraq) to start the war in Iraq. If we want to start a war, we'll start a war. We don't need an attack on our soil (or a solid reason) to start a war. It's as simple as that.

I think this business of flaming people who come to this forum with information they've found captivating when it's simply incongrous with your primordial beliefs needs to stop. Especially when you don't make an effort to debunk it. Zunny's raising points that weren't in the last 9/11 thread.

I'm not sure what to think on this, but I do have one question I don't think I've ever seen answered: Why did Tower #7 collapse?

I've read things that say that there were explosives planted at the ground floor of the WTC that caused it to collapse. However, if anybody bothers to watch the videos, the WTC collapse was a sequential collapse; if weakness at the bottom had caused it to collapse, the top of the WTC would have been intact as it crashed further and further toward the ground. Instead, the top collapsed downward in a big plume of soot and debris, meaning that the structural integrity was compromised at the location of the plane explosion.

That and ALL of the buildings in that plaza were designed specifically to collapse in on themselves or straight down if they ever experienced structural failure. The attackers wanted those towers to fall over and cause widespread devestation; the skill of the people who built the towers ultimately kept that from happening. The same goes for every other building that fell. In a sense, they were controlled demolitions- but by nature of design, not through the assistance of explosives as conspiracy nuts would have you believe. The only large-scale explosions in the WTC that day were caused by two airliners full of innocent civilians.

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine

Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.

I already pointed that out somewhat, but it was conveniently ignored...

1. Did you know that there are multiple ways of spelling "Osama bin Laden?" Including "Usama bin Laden" and "Osama bin Ladin?" Proving that they used a different spelling in the official report proves nothing. It only proves that the writers were familiar with a different form of his name

Quote:

The IDENTITIES of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

2. This is what the BBC article said about them. Not that "the presence of Saudi hijackers on the planes is in doubt." Simply that their identities (obtained from studying grainy surveillance tape) were later found to be wrong. How do we know YOUR family members weren't in their place on the plane?

4. I could see no trucks dumping sand. Unless you mean on the overhead picture, in which case you can see a lot of things there on the ground. Also, it is a common practice to dump sand on fire. And even if it wasn't, what are you trying to imply?

Quote:

Because things that have happened and you
start thinking and placing logic and common sense in your
examinations you will conclude that

I agree with you up to this point. You should start taking your own advice.

If you wanna be a badass ex-marine law enforcment game programmer college graduate, then you can be! I'm just glad we don't see the other part of you where you join AOL chat rooms as "hotchik69" and cyber with guys while you spank off into a sock and then cry yourself to sleep on your cock-shaped pillow.

tzarmind wrote on Sat, 06 January 2007 20:52

Not only did you immaturely edit what J_Ball said in your quote. But you fucking got in the irony truck and drove it straight off a cliff.

Canadacdn wrote on Tue, 23 October 2007 12:04

California burns down every year. I think it's part of nature's cycle.

There ARE trucks dumping sand. However, the point of that was to make it easier for the wheeled vehicles doing the cleanup to move around on the Pentagon "lawn," as opposed to their wheels tearing up all the grass and soil, especially if it were to rain a bit.